Skip to main content

Full text of "This Age of Conflict"

See other formats


By Ivor Benson 

ABOUT THE WRITER: Ivor Benson is a former South African and Fleet Street, 
London, journalist; South African Broadcasting Corporation news analyst and 
commentator 1963/64; Information Adviser to Ian Smith's Rhodesian Front Government 
1964/65; political analyst and author of several books, he has traveled widely. 

Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present 
controls the past 

— George Orwell 

It is almost a joke now in the Western world, in the 20th century, 
to use words like 'good and f evil f . They have become almost old- 
fashioned concepts, but they are very real and genuine concepts. 
These are concepts from a sphere which is higher than us. And 
instead of getting involved in base, petty, short-sighted political 
calculations and games, we have to recognize that the 
concentration of world Evil and the tremendous force of hatred is 
there and it's flowing from there throughout the world. And we 
have to stand up against it and not hasten to give to it, give to it, 
give to it, every-thing that it wants to swallow. 

— Alexander Solzhenitsyn 

Knowledge can be of two kinds: knowledge of the world outside ourselves, the 
macrocosm, and knowledge of the kingdom within, the microcosm, both of 
them boundless. 

The better we know ourselves, the easier it will be to know the world; 
alternatively, the better we know the world, so much easier it will be to know 
ourselves and our deepest and most enduring needs. 

It is not more and more knowledge that we need for the purpose of 
strengthening our position as individuals, but only knowledge of a kind that 
holds together and makes sense. We need a coherent interpretation of the 
history of the age in which we live and an insight into what it is that we must 
have if we are to be physically well and in good spirits. 

The following paragraph from a book by three university historians, published 
in 1949, will serve as a starting point for an exploration of what they describe 
as "this age of conflict": 

Two world wars and their intervening wars, revolutions and crises 
are now generally recognized to be episodes in a single age of 
conflict which began in 1911 and has not yet run its course. It is an 
age that has brought to the world more change and tragedy than 
any other in recorded history. Yet, whatever may be its ultimate 
meaning and consequence, we can already think of it and write of 
it as a HISTORIC WHOLE. (1) (Emphasis added). 

An age of conflict that must be thought of "as a whole" must also be capable of 
being explained and understood as a whole; therefore, it is a highly condensed 
and simplified synopsis of the history of our century that we must have if the 
seemingly interminable succession of "episodes" of conflict and tragedy is to 
be seen as a whole and understood. 

The method I have chosen is to begin with a list of categorical statements 
which can be developed and expanded later and supported with an extensive 
bibliography. Here they are: 

1 . Our century of conflict is the product of an alliance of 
money and intellect, with intellect almost .invariably 
subordinate to, and at the service of, money; money being 
in the 20th century the primary source of great power. 

2. We need to fill and identify the changes which have 
occurred in the realms of money and of intellect, changes 
which have made this century so different from all others in 
recorded history. 

3. The change which has occurred in the realm of money is 
this: Constellations of finance-capitalism which had been 
separate and nationally oriented were absorbed into a 
greater constellation of finance-capitalism serving a 
different set of long-term interests. 

4. The change which occurred in the realm of intellect is this: 
Christian orthodoxy was replaced by an ideology of 
socialism as the basis of a consensus intellectual frame of 
reference and system of values. This socialism or secular 
religion has given rise to what the psychologists Carl 
Gustav Jung has described as a "psychic epidemic" now 
afflicting the educated classes in the West. 

5. The changes which heralded our century of conflict were 
first clearly visible in South Africa in the late 1890s, 
producing the Anglo-Boer war (the first of three great 
fratricidal wars in the west), the beginning of the end of the 

British Empire and the beginning of a new and 
unprecedented kind of world imperium - money- powered, 
race-oriented, Zionist national- socialist. 

6. These changes in money and intellect have drawn the 
peoples of the West into a dialectical trap, with money as 
thesis, socialism as antithesis and the new imperium as 
synthesis; money incessantly concentrates power, socialism 
promises the total dispersal and distribution of power; the 
resolution of this contradiction supplies the new imperium 
with its dynamic. 

7. The process of the transference of financial power to the 
new imperium was only completed in the 1930s when J.P. 
Morgan and the great American pioneering families lost 
their dominance in Wall Street. 

8. The immediate cause of the great increase in conflict all 
over the world: External interference with the natural 
hierarchical system or "pecking order" WITHIN AND 
AMONG ethnic groups, as everywhere states were set up, 
and regimes established, which have no local or 
NATURAL right to exist. This interference by third parties 
is what makes episodes of conflict in the 20th century quite 
different from conflicts in other ages, conferring on all of 
them a shared meaning. 9. All these developments are 
linked to the moral evil of a system of money creation and 
debt in which the nations of the West are at the same time 
offenders and victims. 

We can think of our age of conflict as a historic whole, but what reason do we 
have to believe that it is the product of a uniform and continuous set of 
identifiable causes? 

Students of history can provide innumerable examples of major influences, 
baffling to all at the time of their occurrence, which yielded finally to quite 
simple elucidation and explanation. 

It is not only in history that events widely separated in space and time can be 
found to have, a combined meaning; for example, a few years ago when over a 
period of many months there were visitations of freak weather all around the 
world, in many cases with disastrous consequences the meteorologists were 
soon able to trace them all to a single cause or set of causes: they were able at 
least to show that the storms, floods, hurricanes, droughts, etc, belonged 
together and had an intelligible combined meaning. Needless to say, the 

meteorologists were not hindered in their investigations by "no-go" areas of 
inquiry of the kind to be expected by those who seek to understand worldwide 
visitations of freak political weather. 

We have no reason to suppose that we shall find an explanation of our age (If 
conflict as easy to present and understand as spells of freak weather, but we are 
encouraged to hope that where we see in many parts of the globe, over many 
decades, a recognizable pattern of evil consequences, we can expect to find 
evidence of a uniform pattern of causes. What is required is an interpretation of 
the history of our century which will explain and render mutually intelligible 
the major changes which have occurred - those changes which brought more 
conflict and tragedy than ever before in recorded history. Among the few books 
of history in which any attempt has been made to interpret the history of our 
century as a whole are Oswald Spengler's THE DECLINE OF THE WEST and 
Carroll Quigley's TRAGEDY AND HOPE. 

Spengler's main contribution to historiography is his theory of the morphology 
of history in which he assigns to our present civilization in the West a condition 
of irreversible decline. Paradoxically, he does not regard this as a pessimistic 
view. One fact emerges very clearly in Spengler's analysis: What has happened 
in the 20th century must be seen and studied as an alliance of money and 
intellect with money, rather than pure politics, as the main moving power in 
world affairs. 

Quigley leaves many things unexplained - he may have done so intentionally - 
but he supports with a good deal of documentary evidence the thesis that much 
of what has happened in our century has been deliberately MADE TO 
HAPPEN. What he offers is, in fact, a conspiratorial theory of history involving 
a number of secret and semi-secret organizations like the Rhodes Scholarship 
Trust, the Round Table movement, the Royal Institute of International Affairs 
and the American Council on Foreign Relations, all under the umbrella of what 
he calls an "Anglo-American network" of businessman, educationists, 
politicians and journalists. 

Quigley, who was Professor of History and of International Relations at the 
Georgetown Foreign Service School, Washington DC, supplies much other 
well documented information which no one has yet tried to fit into a general 
inter-interpretation of the history of our century. TRAGEDY AND HOPE was 
hastily withdrawn by its publishers, the Macmillan Company, arguably because 
it was found to have contributed too much to a fully coherent interpretation of 
the history of our century - to the embarrassment of those who prefer to work 
under a cloak of secrecy. 

The theory that much of what has happened has been made to happen is further 
endorsed by another consensus historian, Arnold Toynbee, not in his 
monumental A STUDY OF HISTORY but in his other public utterances, of 
which the following is an example, from a paper read at the Fourth Annual 
Conference of the Institute for the Scientific Study of International Relations at 
Copenhagen in June 1931 (published in INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, 
December 1931): 

We are at present working discreetly but with all our might, to 
wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches 
of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are 
denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands, because 
to impugn the sovereignty of the local national states of the world 
is still a heresy for which a statesman or a publicist can be, 
perhaps not quite burnt at the stake, but certainly ostracized and 

Quite clearly, the denudation of the national states of much of their sovereignty 
during the 20th century represented for Quigley and Toynbee part of the 
progressive fulfillment of their ideal of an elaborately planned "brave new 
world" to be raised on the flattened ruins of the old - for Quigley a world of 
"hope" with which to replace a world of "tragedy, a world of planned 
revolutionary change to replace a disorderly world of slow revolutionary 

Where and when did this age of conflict begin? The three co- authors quoted 
above say that it began in 1914. with World War I; but there are good reasons 
to believe that it began with the Anglo- Boer War of 1898-1902, which we can 
now see quite clearly as the beginning of the end of the British world imperium 
and as marking the inauguration of another imperium of a mysterious kind. 

If our century of conflict can be said to have begun with the Anglo- Boer War, 
then it is in South Africa that we may have the best chance of seeing more 
clearly the crucial historical change that was to spark off a great chain reaction 
of change involving the whole world. 

Until that time the record of the British Empire had been one of continuous 
progress, marred only by the hiving off of the American colonies. Britain had 
out paced all rivals in last century's scramble for colonial possessions, and 
could boast by the turn of the century to possess an "empire on which the sun 
never set". 

However, by a mere accident of history, Afrikaners - Boers, as they were called 
- who had trekked from Britain's Cape Colony into South Africa's virtually 
unpopulated hinterland, suddenly found themselves to be the owners of the 
world's richest gold fields. The eagerness of race-nationalists like Cecil John 
Rhodes and Alfred Milner to add the new Boer Republic of the Transvaal to the 
British Empire is understandable. In the climate of thought and sentiment then 
prevailing, not to have tried to grab so valuable a prize would have been 
virtually unthinkable. 

After a war that proved unexpectedly costly both in lives and money, Britain 
succeeded in adding to its empire both the Transvaal and its ally in the struggle, 
the Orange Free State republic, but all this happened in circumstances 
mysteriously different from those that had attended all previous imperial 
conquests. It was a war over which the British people were themselves sharply 
divided until the first shots were fired by the Boers; it was a war against which 
the British Government had been sternly warned by one of the empire's most 
loyal servants, General Sir William Butler, then Commander- in-Chief of 
British forces in South Africa; it was a war which gave rise to a greater 
outpouring of false communication than any other in British colonial history. 

There was something decidedly different about this tempting opportunity for 
further imperial expansion, which that prominent writer J.A. Hobson explained 
thus in his book THE WAR IN SOUTH AFRICA, while that war was still in 

"We are fighting in order to place a small international oligarchy 
of mine-owners and speculators in power in Pretoria. Englishmen 
would do well to recognize that the economic and political 
destinies of South Africa are, and seem likely to remain, in the 
hands of men most of whom are foreigners by origin whose trade 
is finance and whose trade interests are not British". 

There can be no doubt today about the correctness of that assessment. Thomas 
Pakenham, in his book, THE BOAR WAR, published in 1979, has this to say 
about the causes of that war: 

"First there is a thin golden thread woven by the 'gold bugs', the 
Rand millionaires who controlled the richest mines in the world. It 
has been hitherto assumed by historians that none of the 'gold 
bugs' was directly concerned in making the war. But directly 
concerned they were ... I have found evidence of an informal 
alliance between Sir Alfred Milner, the High Commissioner, and 

the firm of Wernher-Beit, the dominant Rand mining house. IT 

Hobson devotes an entire chapter of his book to mine-ownership in the 
Transvaal. A few of the financial pioneers were Englishmen; he names among 
these Rhodes, Rudd and J.B. Robinson. These had all made their fortunes in 
South Africa, but the others, "the small group of international financiers, 
chiefly German in origin and Jewish in race", were wealthy when they arrived 
in the country and had access to seemingly boundless funds in Europe, 
including the German Dresdner Bank, which Hobson believed to be largely 
owned by Wernher and Beit. Rhodes, too, had to go to an international banking 
dynasty, the London Rothschilds, for money with which to buy out his rivals 
and gain complete control of the diamond industry in Kimberley. 

General Sir William Butler was even more emphatic about the sources of 
power and motivation which were decisive in precipitating the war, "the train- 
layers setting the political gunpowder, as he called them. In a despatch to the 
War Office in June 1899 he wrote: 

"If the Jews were out of the question, it would be easy enough to 
come to an agreement, but they are apparently intent upon 
plunging the country into civil strife ... indications are too evident 
here to allow one to doubt the existence of strong undercurrents, 
the movers of which are bent upon war at all costs for their own 
selfish ends." (4) 

Noticed by few, and by even fewer understood, effective control of the British 
Empire at a decisive point in history had passed, if only momentarily, out of 
essentially British hands. Or, to put it differently, the center of gravity of real 
power in the world had shifted significantly. That was the mysterious change 
that was to inaugurate a chain reaction of more change, first for the British 
Empire and then for the whole world. More precisely, it was the first clear sign 
of the commencement of a process of change in the realm of finance-capitalism 
which was not to be complete before the middle of the 1930s. 

Other changes are less readily noticeable, one of the most important of these 
being radical changes in the methodology of warfare - the human mind itself 
has become a battleground for warring interests as never before in recorded 
history. Political warfare - Von Clausewitz's "war by other means" - there has 
always been but never before on the scale practiced after the turn of the 

century. Persuasion there always was as a means of readying a population for 
war; but the world was to encounter in the late 1890s something unprecedented 
in the quantity and audacity of the lying propaganda that was used in drawing 
the British people into the Anglo-Boer War. 

This new evil, or recurrence of an old evil on a gigantic scale, came as a great 
shock to General Butler, who wrote as follows to the Colonial Secretary on 
December 18, 1898: 

"All the political questions in South Africa and nearly all the 
information sent from Cape Town are being worked by what I 
have already described as a colossal syndicate for the spread of 
false information". 

Hobson wrote in his book THE WAR IN SOUTH AFRICA: 

"South Africa presents a unique example of a large press, owned, 
controlled and operated by a small body of men with the direct 
aim of bringing about a conflict which shall serve their business 

With prophetic insight, Hobson wrote a book, THE PSYCHOLOGY OF 
JINGOISM, which, as an analysis of the dishonest uses of propaganda, bears 
comparison with George Orwell's NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR. 

Only a few of the major historic changes which ensued need be mentioned for 
our present purposes: the Anglo-Boer War; two World Wars; the Bolshevik 
Revolution and setting up of the Soviet Union as an industrial and military 
super-power; the dismantling of the colonial empires and conversion of the 
former colonies into new nations, few of them economically viable; the 
delivery of mainland China and other vast areas in the Far East to totalitarian 
socialist rule; the setting up of the United Nations with its innumerable 
agencies as the prototype of some form of world government; and the 
progressive undermining of the national sovereignty of all the Western nations. 

It is significant that the first years of the 20th century also ushered in a 
phenomenon that was to remain a conspicuous feature of the ensuing age of 
conflict, namely the concentration camp, symbol of an expanded barbarity in 
which civilians join the soldiers in the front line of every major conflict. 

We need to know what were the deep-seated changes in human affairs which 
gave rise to a worldwide chain-reaction of conflict and tragedy. As we shall try 

to show, these deep-rooted changes occurred in two quite separate realms, 
money and intellect. So, let us begin with an examination of the great change 
which took place in the world of money. 

Towards the end of the 19th century money began to acquire a new role and 
meaning in human affairs as economics began to prevail over politics. The two 
need to be clearly distinguished as sources of value, motivation and control at 
the level of leadership. 

Politics is a social function concerned with the total welfare of a community, 
long-term as well as short-term, in which the requirements of economics, 
although always important, have only a supportive or secondary role. Economic 
thinking, a mere department of political thinking, is concerned exclusively with 
the requirements of economic prosperity and progress. It assumes automatically 
that whatever is good for business is good for the community as a whole, an 
attitude of mind that excludes virtually all other considerations. 

What happened towards the end of the 19th century was, therefore, not 
something of sudden occurrence; it must be seen rather as a crucial stage 
having been reached in a process which had continued slowly during most of 
the preceding century. Not only did the Anglo-Boer War signalize the 
beginning of the end of the British Empire, it also signalized the beginning of 
the end of national financial sovereignties all over the Western world, a process 
that was to reach its culmination only in the 1930s when the great American 
pioneering families, headed by J.P. Morgan, were finally edged out of their 
dominating position in Wall Street. 

In the relations of politics and high finance there subsisted a very complex state 
of affairs until shortly before the commencement of World War II, which can 
be briefly explained as follows. 

There had always existed within the national states of the Western world 
families or dynasties of bankers, like the Rothschilds, Warburgs, Montefiores, 
etc. who lent to governments and specialized in transactions across national 
frontiers, but these were never fully integrated as an international system 
capable of controlling politics on an international basis. 

These concentrations of high finance, although always influential, lacked the 
power wholly to control the politics of the national states, but each remained an 
important part of a nationally oriented constellation of financial power. This 
was a situation that suited them well enough in the circumstances prevailing 
until the turn of the century. Enormous influence they could exert, - both 

nationally and internationally, but not the dominating power they were later to 

Paradoxically, in spite of the enormous lead which the Jewish banking 
dynasties had gained in international commerce, it was the gentile financiers 
with their ownership and access to the cornucopia of new wealth, plus their 
control of national politics, who First established high finance on a fully 
internationalized basis. The facts are supplied by Dr. Carroll Quigley: 

The apex of the system was to be the Bank of International 
Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and 
controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves 
private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like 
Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the 
New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of 
France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichbank, sought to 
dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury bonds, 
to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of 
economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative 
politicians by sub-sequent economic rewards in the business 
world. (Tragedy and Hope). 

Quigley explains further that the Rothschilds had been pre-eminent during 
much of the 19th century, but at the end of that century "they were being 
replaced by J.P. Morgan", whose central office was in New York, although it. 
operated as if it were in London "Where it had indeed originated as George 
Peabody and Company in 1838". 

The process by which the separate national concentrations of financial power 
were absorbed into a global concentration was only completed in the 1930s, 
producing among other historical consequences the rise of the Third Reich in 
Germany, the outbreak of World War II and subsequent involvement of the 
United States and Japan, and the setting up of a Marxist-Leninist People's 
Republic of China. 

Professor Quigley supplies many of the facts about the final shift in the center 
of gravity of financial power, and his story begins with these ominous words: 

"The third stage of capitalism is of such overwhelming 
significance in the history of the twentieth century, and its 
ramifications and influences have been so subterranean and even 

occult, that we may be excused if we devote considerable 
attention to its organization and methods." (Opp. cit, p. 50). 

It is the story, assembled from a vast accumulation of documented facts, of a 
process of change in the United States, beginning before World War I, which 
Wilmot Robertson was later to describe as the "dispossession of the American 
majority", (5) culminating in what Quigley calls "a shift on all levels, from 
changing tastes in newspaper comic strips ... to profound change in the power 
nexus of the 'American Establishment'" 

From the 1880s the United States had been ruled from behind the scenes by a 
plutocracy supported by the fortunes of the great American pioneering families 

- Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt, Mellon, Duke, Whitney, Ford, Du Pont, etc 

- a power constellation with J.P. Morgan as its banking center. This "Eastern 
Establishment" is described by Quigley as "high Episcopalian, Anglophile, 
internationalist, Ivy League, and European-culture-conscious", and was 
matched with a similar establishment on the other side of the Atlantic with 
Montagu Norman as its banking head. The two worked closely together and 
came to be known as the "Anglo- American Establishment. 

Quigley tells us of the 

"decline of J.P. Morgan itself from its deeply anonymous status as 
a partnership (founded in 1861) to its transformation into an 
incorporated public company in 1940 to its final disappearance by 
absorption into its chief banking subsidiary, the Guaranty Trust 
Company, in 1959". 

Quigley says that the less obvious implication of the shift in Wall Street was 
the realization by the Morgan group that it no longer had the votes on the Board 
of Trustees of Columbia University to nominate a successor to Dr. Nicholas 
Murray Butler, the retiring president. 

In a word, the control of American higher education had quietly been taken out 
of the hands of America's great pioneering families, described by Quigley as 
"high Episcopalian, Anglophile and European-culture-conscious" - a studiously 
discreet way of saying that they were not Jewish. 

Wall Street fell into the hands of the international financiers like a ripe plum, 
their real battle having been fought and won in the realm of parliamentary 
politics by methods which are still standard practice in the Western world; 
these include the financing of party politics, the manipulation of public opinion 

through the medium of newspapers, radio, the cinema, the book trade, etc, plus 
the penetration, financing and manipulation of trade union movements. 

This was a take-over exercise in which America s emerging secret rulers could 
draw on centuries of accumulated expertise and experience as a nation 
struggling to survive in dispersion. 

The eclipse of the power of the great American Families first took the form of 
taxation laws, beginning with the graduated income tax in 1913 and 
culminating in the inheritance tax, which drove all the great family fortunes 
into the refuge of tax-exempt foundations. Morgan and his circle lost control of 
the Federal Government as one money-and-intellect alliance was subtly 
replaced by another. And the fact that a money-and-intellect alliance behaves in 
much the same way no matter who controls it made the change hard to detect. 

The Morgan group dabbled in the politics of the radical left and lost no time in 
trying to get a foothold in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution. But at this 
game they were no match for their Jewish rivals. The rival Wall Street elites 
were both fired by the ideal and ambition of a "new world order", but there the 
similarity ended. 

The original American establishment, like its British opposite number, was for 
containing the Soviet Union with its socialist rulers with a view to ultimate 
absorption of the Russian empire into a new world order to be raised on the 
foundations of the British Empire and which they, as inheritors of the Rhodes 
dream, would control. The other, the new Eastern Establishment, was for 
building up the Soviet Union as an industrial and military giant which would 
replace the British Empire as the foundation of a new world order 

These developments in the realm of finance capitalism and power politics came 
to a climax towards the end of the 1930s, coinciding with a considerable 
eruption all over the Western world of a social phenomenon misleadingly 
described as "anti-Semitism". (6) 

Professor Hannah Arendt, in her book The Origins of Totalitarianism puts it 
frankly and succinctly: "Twentieth century political developments have driven 
the Jewish people into the storm center of events . . . the Jewish question and 
antisemitism . . . became the catalytic agent first for the rise of the Nazi 
movement and the establishment of the organizational structure of the Third 
Reich . . . then for a world war of unparalleled ferocity." 

Henry Ford, who for many years had roundly condemned all the big bankers as 
the natural enemies of private enterprise industry, now drew a clear distinction 
between the house of Morgan, which he described as "constructive", and its 
rivals, whom he described as "warmongers". (7) Morgan himself, like his 
opposite number in London, Montagu Norman, was known to dislike the Jews. 
The talks of Father Coughlin and writings of Father Denis Fahey, the frantic 
efforts of Charles Lindbergh to keep America out of the war, and the activities 
of Oswald Mosley and his Blackshirts in Britain, were all reactions to the 
appearance of the Jewish people in "the storm center" of 20th century politics. 

What all these alarming developments mean is that a highly concentrated 
Jewish financial power was suddenly seen to be gaining ascendancy in the 

Another layer in the prevailing political reality during the last decades of the 
19th century must now be studied separately - namely, the thoughts about the 
future that were then circulating in the English ruling classes. 

Cecil John Rhodes was one of the most potent men of action in English history, 
but he was also a visionary and dreamer, pictured by friend and foe as a 
callouses bestriding the continent of Africa. His ability to inspire activity and 
loyalty in others was proverbial. In the realm of pure thought, however, the 
unifying and emergising agent was not Rhodes but John Ruskin, at one time 
Slade Professor of Fine Arts at Oxford University, who had armed a generation 
of young Englishmen with an ideology of service having as its object the 
creation of a better and happier world. This was to be imagined as an extended 
application of the civilizing and humanizing concept of the British Empire; it 
was to be a fellowship of free and independent states held together by an 
abstract principle which came to be labeled the "English idea". 

The numinosity, or sense of magic, evoked by these ideas can be traced to a 
single cause: the ideology of a "brave new world", with order and welfare for 
all mankind, was offered as a replacement for a religious orthodoxy that had 
long since begun to crumble under the impact of a scientific "enlightenment"; 
there was something to restore to the existence of the educated and energetic a 
keen sense of meaning, purpose and direction, and ideology, moreover, which 
sanctified imperial expansion and the personal advancement of all its servants. 

So potent was this ideology as a secular religion that it won converts all over 
the Western world; even former leaders of the conquered Boers, including 
General Louis Botha, who was to be South Africa's first Prime Minister, and 
General Jan Christian Smuts, yielded to its psychic charm. 

Practical measures to give effect to this political idealism took the form of a 
range of operations including the Rhodes Scholarship Trust, the semi-secret 
Round Table movement, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the 
American Council on Foreign Relations, etc. 

This was definitely a racial affair, invoking on both sides of the Atlantic a 
genteel racial response. Ralph Durand, in a book about Oxford University 
published in 1909, wrote of "Cecil Rhodes of Oriel, the dreamer of great 
dreams ... Believing that the preservation of the peace of the world lay in the 
hands of men of Teuton blood, he made provision in his will for the founding at 
Oxford of scholarships that would be open to citizens of the British Empire, the 
German Empire and the United States"- OXFORD: ITS BUILDINGS AND 
GARDENS, published by Grant Richards, London. 

The fatal flaw in this ideology does not belong to the art or science of politics 
nor that of high finance, but to an area of knowledge less readily accessible to 
exploration and discussion, namely, metaphysics. Quigley puts his hand on the 
key to that riddle: each of the central banks in the different national states, he 
says, "sought to dominate its government" and to "influence co-operative 
politicians by subsequent rewards in the business world". 

What this means is that something had already gone wrong in the West's 
different national power structures - all had incorporated a system of money 
creation and debt, a corrupting influence with implications of infinite 

Money had become progressively the measure of all things, with a ruling elite 
drawn less and less from the land and more and more from the factory and the 
counting houses. The nations had, in fact, become plutocracies, capable of 
maintaining themselves in power with a public opinion not sought and 
consulted as before but CREATED as required by newspapers, patronage and 
other "rewards in the business world". 

Such a conversion of money into public opinion and support was accomplished 
in Britain by Rhodes and Milner and their "gold bug" partners, with a total 
disregard for all moral considerations. Money had shown what money could 

There was, thus, an iron inevitability about the outcome of a struggle which the 
gentile financiers did not even see as a struggle: AN ALIEN HIGH FINANCE 
firmly united by long-range political aims, increasingly influenced the politics 

of the different national states and finally DISPLACED the gentile financiers as 
managers of the new international banking structure. 

And educated minds, conditioned by John Ruskin's secular ideology calling for 
a "new world" to be raised on the foundations of the British Empire, seem to 
have had no difficulty in transferring their attachment and enthusiasm to a new 
idealogy worked out by Marx and Engles. 

Antony Sutton's trilogy, WALL STREET AND THE BOLSHEVIK 
STREET AND FDR,contains a vast quantity of information but is more 
remarkable FOR WHAT IT OMITS. For that Which is omitted is precisely 
what Professor Hannah Arendt correctly describes as the "catalytic agent" in 
the "storm center of events", namely, the role of the Jewish people in 20th 
century power politics. 

So far as Sutton is concerned there is and always was only one "Wall Street 
Establishment", which is made to carry the main blame for the financing of the 
Bolshevik Revolution and later fur the financing of Hitler's rise to power in 

That is a misleading over- simplification of the story. 

In fact, Wall Street during the two preceding decades had a sort of split 
personality, one half of it symbolized by Morgan and the other by Warbug. It is 
true,as alleged, that "Wall Street" helped to finance the Bolshevik Revolution, 
but in this exercise the Warburg faction (Jacob Schiff in particular) took the 
initiative, with the Morgan faction getting all The bad publicity as they 
belatedly tried to get a share of the action. There is much evidence also to 
support the contention that "Wall Street", this time clearly the Morgan interests, 
supported Hitler's rise to power. But at the same time who, if not the 
internationalists, were funding the Communist Party in these crucial elections 
in Germany in 1930 in which the communists gained spectacular successes? 

The fiercest political struggles in the 1930s all over the West can now be more 
clearly seen as so many proxy battles on behalf of rival concentrations of 
financial power, culminating in World II and the triumph of the 

In Britain opposition to World War II came from what remained of the British 
end of the original Anglo-American establishment, labeled the "Clivenden set" 
- Cliveden being the name of the home of Lord Astor. 

This interpretation will also help to explain one of the weirdest and most 
mysterious episodes in American history - a reported attempt, with the 
assistance of the American Legion and armed forces, to set up a "fascist style" 
dictatorship in the White House. 

News of the plot was given brief front-page treatment in the NEW YORK 
TIMES on November 21, 1931; a congressional committee was set up to 
investigate the allegations; but then all news of the plot faded out of the press. 
Those involved included a few leading personalities in the American Legion 
and another organization known as Liberty League, which together seem to 
have undertaken to make available a force of 500,000 men. Leadership of the 
operation was offered to Major-General Smedley D. Butler, a much decorated 
military hero, but there is no real evidence that he ever agreed to go along with 
the plotters. (8) 

Significantly, it is exclusively the gentile power -wielders of big finance and 
big business who were identified as the culprits behind the scene, all linked in 
one way or another with J.P. Morgan: Grayson Murphy, a director of the 
Guaranty Company; Jackson Martindell, associated with Stone and Webster, 
allied to the Morgans; the DuPont Company; the Remington Arms Company, 
controlled by DuPont; and the Morgan-Harriman financial interests. It would 
seem, therefore, that the Morganite financiers and industrialists, finding 
themselves at last outmaneuvered and outgunned in Wall Street, were tempted 
to take desperate measures against the international financiers - as had been 
done with some success in Italy and Germany. 

As the rivalry of separate national constellations of financial power gave rise to 
last century's scramble for colonial possessions, so the consolidation of 
financial power on a global basis in the 20th century required the dismantling 
of all the colonial empires and their replacement with innumerable new states 
over which the separate nations of the West would be able to exercise little or 
no influence. 

A clear distinction must, thus, be drawn between the pace and quantity of 
change and conflict in the world up until 1939, when the new imperium was 
still in the process of being established, and the pace and quantity of change 
and conflict after the new imperium had emerged as the only real victor in 
World War II. 

So much for the revolutionary change which occurred in the realm of high 

We must now briefly examine a fundamentally charged Western intellect, 
which can be regarded as one of the main causes of our century of conflict - the 
other half of that "alliance of money and intellect". 

The change can be said to have begun more than two centuries ago and to have 
been concomitant with the decline of Christianity as the consensus religion of 
the West. 

The new kind of thinking and the new system of values which were 
inaugurated as a result of the decline of the influence of Christian orthodoxy 
came to be known as socialism. Socialism however, was only one of the 
symptoms of something much deeper with profound metaphysical implications, 
a condition better represented by the words "idealism" and "humanism"; 
socialism is, in fact, only idealism with an economic and political programme 
of sorts. 

So, it is this "idealism" which we need to understand, an attitude to existence 
that responds readily to any plausible programme or ideology proposing the 
betterment of the world and of mankind. Such ideologies have included 
anarchism, nihilism, syndicalism, socialism, communism, etc. This idealism 
supplies the psychic foundation for a system of secular belief which acquires 
the force and intensity of the religion which it has replaced. 

There is a fundamental and most important difference between 1- a 
metaphysical or religious system of belief, and 2- a secular or humanist system 
of belief . The difference can be stated as follows: 

1 . All the great religions which have endured down the ages, however 
different in their orthodoxies are founded on the central belief that 
human existence, like everything else in the universe, is governed by 
immutable laws of cause and effect which the intelligence must discover 
and obey. What this amounts to is a recognition that human freedom 
finds fulfillment only as FREEDOM UNDER LAW. We are free to do 
as we please but, if we are to avoid the disappointment of our hopes and 
expectations, if we are to preserve psychic health, we must first find out 
what can and what cannot be done. 

2. Fundamental to idealism or humanism is the notion that the intellect is 
fully qualified to be a law unto itself in promoting purposes which can 
be visualized or imagined as socially advantageous, that is, well 
intentioned and for the common good. The element of error in this 

perception of the intellect as the highest source of guidance in human 
affairs is extremely subtle, hard to detect, and even harder to explain; it 
can be compared with a compass deflection in navigation which 
progressively falsifies all positional and directional calculations. The 
ancients called it HUBRIS, an attitude that presupposes that the intellect 
can conquer life itself as it can conquer the human environment. Milton 
handles this most profound theme in the language of symbolism in his 
great epic poem PARADISE LOST. (9) 

The almost irresistible attraction of socialism for the educated classes who last 
century found themselves without the support of their ancestral Christian faith 
is, therefore, understandable for it supplied a highly plausible and ingeniously 
elaborated framework of ideas calculated to free the world from many evils and 
to bring happiness and contentment to mankind. It offered to the educated 
individual a laudable ambition and an integrated intellectual frame of reference 
which promised to infuse his existence with meaning and purpose. 

Yet it is precisely this idealism, this attitude and this plausible kind of thinking, 
which has given the world a century of conflict and tragedy without precedent 
in recorded history. 

Frankly, evil intentions in other ages never produced cruelty and disorder on so 
vast a scale as idealism or humanism have produced in the 20th century. 

Evil at the service of good intentions has been exposed by the experience of 
history as capable of producing the most dreadful consequences. It is in this 
area of conduct where ends are called on to justify means that the mind makes 
mistakes of a kind that the mind itself can not easily understand and where the 
mind is most exposed to the influences of hostile cunning. The great mistake is 
to suppose that the means used can be justified by the quality of the ends 
proposed when, in fact, as experience may only demonstrate belatedly, it is 
only the actual results produced that can ever justify the means. 

The idea that the laudable end envisioned, however distantly separated from the 
present, justifies the employment of whatever means are required for its 
attainment, is thus fundamental to idealism or humanism in whatever form it 
may take, whether as socialism or as that benevolent imperialism preached by 
John Ruskin and which captivated the mind of the young Cecil John Rhodes. 

Political idealism in action exhibits two major negative aspects: it undertakes 
long-term enterprises which are incapable of actualization because in conflict 
with unalterable requirements of human nature as expressed in instinct, and it 

produces among its "believers" a progressive blunting or description of what, 
for want of a more precise description, we can call "a sense of evil". In other 
words, immoral behavior in the service of an ideal is condoned and even 
recommended, and any suffering that ensues is habitually regarded with 
indifference as part of the price that must be paid for "progress". 

Socialism as a substitute for a discredited religious orthodoxy, after a long 
period of incubation in Germany and central Europe early in the 19th century, 
was given a more scholarly form as "dialectical materialism", a materialistic 
interpretation of existence, by Karl Marx and was later presented in a more 
delusive and accept- able form by leading British intellectuals, including 
Edward Pease, George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. The Fabian Society 
and later the London School of Economics were then set up as seedbeds for the 
future proliferation of socialist ideas and ideals throughout the English- 
speaking world, including the United States. Significantly Julius Wernher, of 
the Wernher-Beit conglomerate that supported Milner's effort to precipitate the 
Anglo-Boer War, contributed substantially to the funding of the London School 
of Economics and socialist movements everywhere, all vehemently "anti- 
capitalists", continued to receive massive support from the most powerful 

ANTAGONISM between the philosophies of Juhn Ruskin and of Karl Marx 
that it was possible for the "Brave new World" ambition, so actively promoted 
by Rhodes and his heirs, to be absorbed into the socialist world-power vortex 
with hardly a sign that anything untoward had happened. In fact, the 
international socialists, instruments of the most highly concentrated financial 
power, were able to take over the Rhodes-Milner establishment, complete with 
its worldwide network of organizations - the Rhodes Scholarship Trust, the 
Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the 
Trilaterals, etc - and continue to run it as if still under its original management; 
indeed, it simply gave the socialists a new Dimension for the exercise of their 
incomparable skill in the arts of deception. 

The decay of Christianity in its orthodox forms, and especially in its 
institutionalized form as the Church, proved overwhelmingly to the advantage 
of the new order of financiers. 

For many centuries in the West, Christian orthodoxy had been more than 
something to believe; it had become a world view, an interpretation of the 
totality of existence and, as such, the very medium in which men's minds had 
their reality, as water is the medium in which fish fulfill their existence. The 

educated classes in the west would need a new religion, better still a secular 
substitute, one fully in harmony with the new rationalist climate of thought 
engendered by a triumphant science. This was provided in the form of 
socialism, an intellectual frame of reference and system of values which has 
continued to dominate higher education in the West into the beginning of the 
20th century, especially in academic disciplines like history, anthropology, 
sociology and political science 

This socialism can be said to have two separate and different realities: 1- It is 
something that can be believed; and 2- It is something that can be used. 
Spengler recognized socialism's double character when he remarked that every 
proletarian movement, even a communist one, "Operates in the interest of 
money" adding significantly "without the idealist in its ranks having the 
slightest suspicion of the fact". (10) 

The crippling effect of socialism as an intellectual frame of reference can be 
ascribed to the fact that it is basically a confidence trick, one of the components 
of a dialectical trap with money that funds socialism as THESIS, a socialism in 
which men believe as ANTITHESIS and "the new imperium" as SYNTHESIS. 
Money grabs and concentrates power and socialism promises the ultimate 
redistribution of ownership and power; the resolution of this contradiction 
supplies the new imperium with its irresistible dynamic. 

But why should an alliance of money and intellect ostensibly bent on reforming 
the world and reducing it to order have produced in the 20th century so much 
more conflict than was produced last century and earlier when the nations of 
Europe were engaged in a competitive scramble for aggrandizement, and 
especially for colonial possessions? 

It would appear that money and intellect as determinants in the shaping of 
history had undergone a radical change for the worse, giving rise, among other 
phenomena, to what Professor P.T. Bauer has described as "an undeclared, one- 
sided civil war in the West". (11) 

A money power alien to the West cannot tolerate health, strength and order in 
the West; it is, therefore, committed to policies of destructiveness. Health, 
strength and order in any part of the world can only mean selfwill and self 
determination in that area, an obstacle to money's global power-concentrating 
purposes. An alien money power needs a world of ethnic communities reduced 
to a condition of arrested cultural and political development and has 
concentrated its enmity on the Western community of nations, which it sees as 
the main rival for world dominion. 

The new imperium finds its strength in the weakness of all those it seeks to 

The 19th century plutocracies, by contrast, could not afford to weaken their 
own national communities; and by undisguised direct rule in their colonies, 
requiring little force, were able to create areas of order which were able to 
create areas of order which were almost always under their control. Moreover, 
the colonial powers tended to leave as much as possible unchanged and 
undisturbed in the areas which came under their control, ruling as far as 
possible through the medium of traditional institutions. Placing themselves, as 
it were, at the top of the primaeval hierarchical order. 

The new imperium has spread conflict and disorder trying to rule secretly and 
indirectly by means of artificially contrived surrogate regimes, everywhere 
disrupting the natural hierarchical order within and between ethnic groups. In 
other words, an extraneous power has everywhere prevented the emergence of 
what Robert Ardrey would call the natural "pecking order" within and between 
contiguous ethnic groups. In fact, in very many instances, a reversal of the 
ancient "pecking order" (12) has been found necessary by the world's new 
secret rulers. (13) 

It is this disturbance of relationships within and between ethnic groups which 
has given the 20th century an age of conflict and tragedy without precedent in 
world history. 

A process of unfolding history having as its culmination the decline of the West 
and a century of unprecedented conflict can be traced to many causes, but 
central to all the corrupting principle of USURY - money traded as a 
commodity and lent at interest - as a component of the world's monetary 

Our century of conflict thus has many meanings, some of them beyond our 
powers of understanding, but that which we need and can use is the knowledge 
that the peoples of the West have only themselves to blame for the plight in 
which they and the rest of the world find themselves today; for they have 
themselves created the morally unhygienic conditions in which evil flourishes 
as never before. The prediction and promise of the Old Testament prophets has 
been fulfilled: the nation of lenders has become "the head" and all the others, 
blind to usury's hidden peril, "the tail" 


1. This Age of Conflict, F.P. Chambers, C.P. Harris and C. G. Bayley 
(Harcourt Brace & Co). 

2. See, The Siege of South Africa, (Institute for Historical Review), and 
The Zionist Factor (Veritas), both Ivor Benson. 

3. See, The Zionist Factor, above mentioned. 

4. An Autobiography, Sir William Butler (Constable). 

5. The Dispossessed Majority, Wilmot Robertson (Howard Allen) 

6. See, Antisemitism, Bernard Lazare (Britons); The Zionist Connection, 
Alfred M. Lilienthal (Veritas); The Controversy of Zion, Douglas Reed 
(Veritas); and others. 

7. Who Financed Hitler, James Pool and Suzanne Pool (Dial Press) 

8. War is a Racket, Smedley Butler (Noontide Press) 

9. See, A Preface to Paradise Lost, C. S. Lewis (Oxford University Press). 
10. The Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler, (Allen & Unwin). 

11. Equality, the Third World and Economic Delusion, P.T. Bauer 
(Weidenfeld & Nicolson). 

12. African Genesis, Robert Ardrey (Collins). 

13. See, 'Dr. Sun Yat-sen and the Principals of Nationalism' in Truth Out of 
Africa. Ivor Benson (Veritas). 

14. See, The Controversy of Zion, Douglas Reed (Veritas). 

Other References in Text: 

• Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Harcourt Brace 

• Ralph Durand, Oxford: It's Buildings and Gardens (Grant Richards) 

• J.A. Hobson, The Psychology of Jingoism, and the War in South Africa 
(James Nisbet). 

• John Milton, Paradise Lost (New American Library). 

• George Orwell, 1984 (Seeker & Warburg) 

• Thomas Pakenham, The Boer War (Weidenfeld & Nicolson) 

• Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (Macmillan Company). 

• Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, and Wall 
Street and the Rise of Hitler (both Veritas), and Wall Street and FDR 
(Random House). 

• Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History. 

Part II of This Age in Conflict 


The plan, I think, is the old one of world dominion in a new form ... the money-power and 
revolutionary power have been set up and given sham but symbolic shapes ('Capitalism" or 
"Communism') and sharply defined citadels ('America' or "Russia') . . . Such is the spectacle 
publicly staged for the masses. But what if similar men, with a common aim, secretly rule in 
both camps and propose to achieve their ambition through the clash between those masses? 
I believe any diligent student of our times will discover that this is the case. 

— Douglas Reed 

The art of music above all the other arts is the expression of the soul of a nation, and by a 
nation I mean . . . any community of people who are spiritually bound together by language, 
environment, history, and common ideals and, above all, a continuity with the past. 

— Vaughan Williams 

The Diagram: 

A falsified science of 
RELIGION economics and fraudulent 

Massive financial monetary system, 
support for aberrant 
trends which have the 
effect of secularising 
and politicising 



htitement & 
support of internal 
tornmunist revolt. 

Falsification & 

Falsification of 
science, especially 
anthropology and 

riiK. ci:n'j'i:k 

Aft ilk-xilLiihik- 

lVIohov Power 

dxtwuig [1a main 

slrunj$Lh from usury ;,_ 

j jjjkvV'i] fcijurocrflcy:' 

Jht- supcrcaplialijtl- 

, Ci.>m mic -ZEoui 31 



Subversion of 

culture; literature, 

art, music, etc; 

underminrtg of 

cultural institutions 

and traditions: church* 

family, nation, etc. 

Ownership & control 
of mari channels of 
access to the public 

Fnancial Control 
& manipulation 
of party politics. 

Undermrwig of 
private enterprise 
progressive state 

Finarkcial and Tech 
support for Marxist 
regjmes; hostility 
toward all forms of 
nationalism and 
anti- communism 

We print the diagram above with its explanatory notes because we believe that what the worldwide counter- 
revolutionary movement needs more than anything else is a composite or total view of its field of 
operations, as a corrective to the present appalling fragmentation. 

Too often those who fight a common enemy on different fronts do not even know each other, each 
convinced that he alone is fighting the real battle against the real enemy; some wholly engrossed with 
economic and monetary issues; others with drug abuse and pornography; some convinced that any effort 
outside party politics is a sheer waste of time if not counter-productive; some see it as a purely cultural 
struggle; others as a religious struggle; and others again as a struggle that will be won or lost in the 
universities, etc. 

Meanwhile, there is good reason to believe that the problem of fragmentation is already solving itself, as 
different groups and individuals, defending various values, find themselves converging on a more clearly 
identifiable enemy. 

The message of our diagram should be self-evident. No matter how we see our own immediate battle-front, 
let us not forget that the ultimate enemy, the fountainhead of social and political evil in our times, is an 
illegitimate Money Power which can survive and expand only by exploiting the morally poisonous 
principle of usury. 

Explanation of the Diagram 


Mass Media 


Internal Policy 

Foreign Policy 






THE CENTER: An illegitimate Money Power 
drawing its main strength from usury; a global 
usurocracy: the Supercapitalist - Communist - 
Zionist nexus. 

The source of all great power in the 20th century is money, as in other ages (like that of Alexander the 
Great) it was the possession of superior fighting forces. And the source of power from all other sources, 
is the morally indefensible principle of usury, the most destructive single product of which is the issue 
of money for all ordinary purposes as interest-bearing debt. 

In the Holy Bible usury is condemned as "an abomination: not be practiced on a brother." Usury is also 
defined as a means of gaining power over others: 

"And thou shalt lend onto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow: and thou shalt reign 
over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee: (Deuteronomy 15:16); and, ". . . 
thou shalt lend onto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow. And the lord shall make 
thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be 

(Deuteronomy 28:12) 

This is the Levitical priesthood speaking, not God of the New Testament (see, Douglas Reed in THE 

And upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity . . . 

(Luke 21:25) 

ECONOMICS: A falsified science of economics 
and a fraudulent monetary system. 

What would be the first requirement of an illegitimate money power secretly exploiting an evil 
principle, advantageous to itself and antagonistic to the interest of the millions who labor to supply 
goods and services? 

W^^u^fe^fiM^ampS^S^^e^MftiMliief aft m®$faffi^nM^1$vMmm&f^Mmg an 

©bflcwirt&yf j^iMipfef§f &#htiae©^^a?fcb(alaiwPrii&PtoiB4 m&h%bm\&&mmip®&mvmen an 


EkplysqiH&<matoi§WfM^ a fewrfewd^ap^taMf 

most oppressive lien on the productive powers of mankind - of which lien America's rapidly increasing 
MfeSflfi^eSbigMlllt^IiiMaJ'il^apsulated the truth about the media in two short sentences: 

Political $^jci^iiilspt^pl^siftferBK<©feS6te ffM^§tpwIS€^Hmb^i\^sM3fc§ate»J&Sed to grind 
the masfcefiiggpfeift&lctl&fi eMSgMfes^,Qh^<8g^&lflV§Mtf^^^ 

incomett^Mgpfedigi^tiBllAti^ individuals capable of 

serving as nuclei of popular resistance. 

Malcolm Muggeridge puts it this way: 

The same arcane "science" of economics prevents those who work and produce, the real generators of 

value, frrottiO&ZMdi^ - is 

delibera^ftgfeywt^flg^i^f]^ tov^m£F#e<$n&S& fefeu^ike 

including major banks, are in possession of a grossly unfair share of things of real value - that is, goods 
SPW& p&J£f$,- of course, very effectively controlled by those who own it, as a British Royal Commission 
found. The simple answer to Solzenitsyn's rhetorical question is that the press isn't elected at all and is 
EaSV^Stfld^^iSWG&fene^ nearly 


And ho\Pl<s fffl&£»fffel fe»^B^ai|Xe¥it^PB^^^M?M^aI^¥MlS?Plbwf 1(^1 is solved 
MISINT^f'Fffin^TiawiaMsgtmr* perhaps the most important of all, since it 

needs only a small quantity of truth to overthrow a vast quantity of falsehood; not to mention 
DEFAMATION which is the favorite weapon usedPgg^lfist those who challenge the monopoly of public 

Who ever knew truth to be put to the worse in a free and open encounter 

— John Milton 

MASS MEDIA: Ownership and control of main 
channels of access to the public mind. 

What next? Supplied with unlimited funds and the control of mass media, what is the next most 
important requirement of an imperialism of illegitimate money power? 

In the Western world, obviously, the control of party politics, the control of parliaments which make the 
laws; better still, the control of chief executives, presidents, dictators, etc. who have been largely 
FREED from the necessity of consulting parliaments. 

There are two kinds of people who do not understand that "democracy" as practiced in most of the 
countries of the West is a swindle: 

1- Those who are so stupid and irresponsible that they do not even try to understand; 

2- Those who, participating in the modern party political fiasco, enjoy the patronage of 
their country's secret rulers. 

Immigration control policies in all Western countries (Britain, Europe, the United States, Canada, 
Australia, New Zealand), policies obviously in conflict with NATIONAL interest, are intelligible only 
as aspects of a single, worldwide plan of population control - which can thus be described as one policy 
severally applied, revolutionary and conspirational in character. 

As a result of the implementation of this policy, there have been mass infusions of unassimilable 
population minorities into all the countries of the West, some legally as immigration labor and many 
others under the description of refugees seeking asylum from political persecution in their ancestral 

There is good reason to believe that this invasion of population elements from India, Pakistan, Sri 
Lanka, Bangladesh, the West Indies, etc, has been financed and organized as a geo-political operation 
designed to disrupt the ethnic, cultural and political unity and integrity of all the countries of the West, 
the main purpose being to pre-empt any collective resistance to the planned new international economic 

The policy being applied simultaneously in so many countries has two aspects: one OVERT and the 
other COVERT, the one in terms of what the law allows and the other in terms of what the law is 
supposedly powerless to prevent. A fraudulent device is thus used to circumvent public opposition to 
the importation of unassimilable population elements. 

Simultaneously a strict enforcement of an ingeniously devised and highly complex system of 
immigration regulations makes it almost impossible for White persons born in the Third World (India, 
Sri Lanka, Pakistan, West Indies, etc) to return to their ancestral homelands in Europe. The West's 
White peoples are being boxed COLLECTIVELY but only experience their imprisoned condition 
separately and INDIVIDUALLY - hence the absence of collective awareness and response; it is only 
when they want to move that they find out they are prohibited from doing 50. 

The thesis here offered is that the immigration laws and procedures in Western countries are separate 
components of a single global population control plan, and that this plan is only an aspect of a money- 
powered revolutionary operation that has been gathering force since shortly before the turn of the 20th 

Democracy as practiced today is a fraudulent misrepresentation wearing the disguise of an "ideal". The 
masses will always be ruled by the few; and only question ever to be settled is WHICH FEW. Those 
who rule will always do so on behalf of a nation; the only question ever to be settled is WHICH 

The principles of true politics are those of morality enlarged; and I neither now do, nor 
ever will admit of any other. 

POLITICS: Financial control and manipulation 
of party politics. 

INTERNAL POLICY: Undermining of private 
enterprise capitalism; progressive state 

The mystery of mysteries of 20th century politics, an enigma all mummified and wrapped in mystery, is 
the weird relationship of supercapitalism, or international finance capitalism, and communism, or 

These two quite indisputable facts of history, although not generally known: 

1- The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia could never have taken place without massive 
financial support from the West, including Wall Street; 

2- The industrial and military might of the Soviet Union is almost entirely a creation of 
Western high finance and big business, especially American. 

Inside most of the countries of the so-called free or "non-socialist" world precisely the same motives 
have been powerfully at work during the greater part of this century, systematically undermining the 
private-enterprise capitalist system, replacing it, piece by piece, with elements of pure socialism. And 
not surprisingly, therefore, most Western governments can be seen to be implementing in all kinds of 
ways Karl Marx's own ten points of policy calculated to bring the whole world under a socialist 

What this means, quite simply, is that in the West the method of socialist revolution by stealth had been 
chosen, as being more likely to succeed, in preference to violent revolution as used in Russia and 

There can be no doubt, therefore, that those who control finance capitalism in its greatest 
concentrations, often with governments as their main clients, saw instantly in the Marxist doctrine and 
ingenious method of converting great money power into political power, while at the same time 
harnessing to their purpose all the energies of supercapitalism's potentially most dangerous opponents, 
the intellectuals. For Marxism gave them the means of presenting, in idealistic and ideological disguise, 
motives of gross power appetite which, for obvious reasons, cannot bear exposure. 

This helps to explain why the politics of the super-rich is invariably leftist, or socialist, and why their 
animosity is concentrated against conservatives who, among other things, are dedicated to the 
preservation of free-enterprise capitalism. 

POSTSCRIPT: The dismal performance of state-owned enterprises has stopped nationalization in the 
West, but Drivate-entemrise caoitalism continues to wither as high-interest debt-financing draws 

ownership of property and resources increasingly into the hands of large financial institutions. 

FOREIGN POLICY: Financial and 
technological support for Marxist regimes; 
hostility towards all forms of nationalism and 

It would be hard to imagine any worldwide news blackout to compare with the suppression of 
information about the transfer of Western wealth and technology to the Soviet Union. A few sentences 
from a statement made by Dr. Antony Sutton on 15 August 1972, before one of the sub-committees of 
the Republican Party at Miami Beach, Florida, and TOTALLY BLACKED OUT by the wire services 
and the media, will have to suffice: 

"In a few words, there is no such thing as Soviet technology. Almost all - perhaps 90-95 
percent came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect, the 
United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union, its industrial 
capabilities and its military power. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. 
Since the Revolution in 1917. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plant, 
equipment and technical assistance". 

The details, fully documented, can be found in the massive three- volume series, WESTERN 
Hoover Institution, Stanford University, California. 

Another aspect of foreign policy which places an oppressive burden on those who work and produce, 
mostly in the form of taxation and inflation, is so-called "foreign aid" (or "aid to under-developed 
countries", or "less developed countries"), which Professor P.T. Bauer, of the London School of 
Economics, has correctly described as "a gigantic confidence trick which impoverishes the poor in the 
developed countries and enriches the rich in the under-developed countries". 

In this way, an illegitimate money power further enriches itself and promotes political purposes which 
bring no advantage whatever to those who work and produce. 

Some of these groups envisage the Third World as a weapon in what is in effect an 
undeclared, one-sided civil war in the West. Some of these groups have consistently and 
effectively promoted the cause of wealth transfers from the West. 

— P.T. Bauer 


CULTURE: Subversion of culture: (literature, 
art, music etc); undermining of cultural 
institutions and traditions: (church, family, 
nation, etc.) and traditions. 

What more is needed to give an illegitimate money power the security IT needs? Quite a lot, as we shall 

Organ-transplant surgeons encounter a problem called "rejection" - which means that the living 

p™ t& \m^m^A s mv^Mimmmf jto^.^M Ms^G^ssM^Wf^s - like 

fififlffifflStfc^^H^ics, chemistry, geology, etc - these the money power needs and must have, for 
obvious reasons; what it does not want and must exclude at any price is truth which explains mankind 
U\mmrM^m^MmM^m^%^sm4it^M QV ^ a system, or an ordering of its existence, which it 
is instinctively programmed to reject, means must be found to reduce it to a condition of attenuated 

ffiBHpHfl&MSe^ genetics, psychology, history - to 

name only a few. 

So, what has been done in our century to REDUCE mankind, especially Western man, to a condition of 

T^fS^if^fte^ftHBS^Sification, and attendant defamation of those who refuse to submit, can be 
traced back to their source in the money power, which finally decides who shall be appointed to a 

ftB^lSlk Wd°i'WMtffl!l ar tyP es of so-called "pop" or popular music; pornography; theater and cinema 
ingeniously laced with debilitating ethical poison; the boosting and encouragement of decadence in 

TfKf^ IMSaa^^rfeTOnest anthropology of men like Professor Carleton Coon, Sir Arthur Keith, Do. 
John Baker, we have the fraudulent psychology of men like Carl Gustav Jung, William James, Thomas 

p^Qainment calculated to plant confusion and paralyze the will at source. 

CulturaJ^^^iyaa^fe 3»qH&8^M^ most 

degradq&tf^ and emulated by the young. 

Music is uniquely related to the will.__ Thomas Szasz 
- Schopenhauer 

SCIENCE: Falsification of science, especially 
anthropology and psychology. 

HISTORY: Falsification and suppression of 

Can people be fully and accurately informed about what has happened in the past without being 
strengthened in their ability to cope with the present? Of course not! It goes without saying that the 
falsification and suppression of news goes hank-in hand with the falsification and suppression of 
history, especially of recent history - since, obviously, people will lose all confidence in the media if 
they discover today that they were lied to or prevented from getting at the truth five, ten or twenty years 

The control of written history - historiography - has become a major feature of modern political 
warfare, in which it is those who don't know or are wrongly informed who are overthrown. 

Unless we know what happened in the past we cannot know what is happening now - for it is only what 
happened in the past that gives meaning to much of what is happening now. And if we don't know what 
happened in the past and is happening now, we have no way of helping to determine what will happen 
in the future, for ourselves as individuals and for our community. Hence, as George Orwell puts it: 

"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past". 

Control of the study of history in our time, especially the history of our century, is exercised also by 
means of a system of intellectual terrorism designed to suppress information of the kind that arms us in 
our minds against an enemy whose great power in the world is little more than a power to deceive. 

AGITATION: Incitement and support of 
internal communist revolutionary activity. 

There must be few countries in the world, if any, where the nexus between the capitalist super-rich and 
a Marxist-Communist, supposedly anti-capitalist, revolutionary underground has been more clearly 
established than South Africa. 

Likewise, there must be few places where it has been easier to study that weird alliance of the 
circumcised and the uncircumcised - the excluded, using their great newspaper chains to give the 
maximum of sympathetic publicity to a communist revolutionary underground that has always been 
overwhelmingly Jewish at the leadership level. The support which the South relied on to give the leftist 
radicals was acknowledged in one short sentence from communist underground leader Abram Fischer: 

"Our press has done a wonderful job!" 

This statement, which formed part of one of Fischer's regular analyses of the revolutionary situation, 
clearly referred to the local 'capitalist" newspapers and reflected no more than what any intelligent 
observer could see for himself. 

The nexus between supercapitalism and communism has been harder to conceal in South Africa than in 
most other countries, for the reason that in South Africa there was no proletariat of the kind to be found 
in most other industrially developed countries, no underworld of snarling and envious drop-outs, no 
proletariat as prescribed by Marxist doctrine and Leninist revolutionary science. Therefore, communist 
revolution had to take the form of a "Black nationalist" exercise - and the White activists found they 
had to do most of the insurrectionary dirty work with their own hands, the blacks having proved to be 
insufficiently motivated for elaborately planned operations of the kind required. 

And investigations have fully exposed unbroken lines of communication and funding between the 
revolutionary underground in South Africa and all the centers of great financial and political power 
outside South Africa - on both sides of the Iron and Bamboo Curtains. 

We see the present undeclared war against South Africa as only one small portion of what Professor 
Bauer has dared to call "an undeclared and one-sided civil war in the West" - a war aimed not only at 
White people in South Africa but at ethnic entities and their cultures wherever they may be. There is 
only one world-revolution in progress, no matter from what quarter being promoted and directed, and 
all peoples of Western European provenance, wherever they may live, are as much the targets and 
intended victims of the revolution as the South Africans. 

The West has been crippled by a corrosive and corrupt ideology-morality that causes our 
political-intellectual elites to declare themselves in sympathy with and in support of the 
very elements that boldly proclaim their goal to be the destruction of the West. 

— Richard Clark 

RELIGION: Massive financial support for 
aberrant trends which have the effect of 
secularizing and politicizing religion. 

There can be no doubt that the greatest possible source of resistance to illegitimate power is to be found 
in a people's religion, whose central purpose it is to give the individual a spiritual and intellectual form 
base from which to relativise all the pressures and influences he encounters, and secure a deep-rooted 
sense of purpose and direction. 

Thus, religion, by whatever name it is called, must always be at the core of a people's culture, nourished 
by and giving nourishment to all the arts. 

From which it follows that religious error must have the most destructive consequences when exploited 
by powers whose purposes are anything but religious. 

All the more so when error is of a kind which, like todav's social gosoel heresv. defeats religion's 

central purpose, and substitutes for inner illumination a set of spurious brain-spun "ideals" 
indistinguishable from those which activate Marxist trade union leaders and unscrupulous politicians. 

The result has been a secularization and politicization of Christianity in the West, with the setting-up, at 
very great cost, of a worldwide organization centered on the World Council of Churches. 

To borrow an expression from the American poet Ezra Pound, "there is no mediaeval description of hell 
which exceeds the inner filth" of the mentalities of some of the ministers and prelates for whom every 
species of cruelty and villainy is condoned, even incited, if perpetrated under the banner of universalist 
political objectives prescribed by the money power. 

Not surprisingly, these same churchmen can be relied on to block "by diseased will or sodden inertia: 
(Ezra Pound's words) any cleansing of a monetary system that gives to them so much power and 
importance; they will quote you the Bible on every sin in the calendar but never against the 
fountainhead of every species of sin - the practice of usury. 

Christianity holds at its core a symbol which has for its content the individual way of life 
of a man, the Son of Man, and it even regards this individuation process as the 
incarnation and revelation of God himself. 

- C.G. Jung 


The world is governed by very different persons to what is imagined by those who are 
not themselves behind the scene. 

— Benjamin Disraeli 

Even the briefest survey of the forces which are shaping the history of the 20th century, creating social 
and political conditions correctly described by Spengler as "anarchy become a habit", would be 
incomplete without a closer look at the relationship of those supposed mighty opposites - capitalism and 

The key to the riddle is the word CAPITALISM. Most people, most of the time, make the mistake of 
supposing that the word capitalism means one thing; in fact, the word as commonly used has two sets of 
meaning, as different as chalk and cheese. If we are to understand why governments representing 
capitalist states adopt the most weirdly ambivalent attitudes towards communism, we must first learn to 
separate in our minds the two sets of meaning which that one word capitalism has been called on to 

Thus, two words are needed: CAPITALISM meaning what that word originally meant and what the 
dictionary says it means; and SUPERCAPITALISM, meaning the wholly changed form of what was 
once correctly called capitalism. 

CAPITALISM as originally and correctly understood means private ownership of property and 
resources and competitive free enterprise in the supply of goods and services. 

SUPERCAPITALISM, which can be defined as highly concentrated finance-capitalism, is not only 
different from capitalism, it is the antithesis of capitalism and sooner or later acquires the character of 
being actively ANTI-CAPITALIST. 

For it is not possible to continue CONCENTRATING ownership and control of property and resources 
without at the same time REDUCING the number of those who own and control property and 
resources. Likewise, there can be no huge concentration of ownership and control without a 
corresponding inhibition or suppression of competitive free enterprise. What we have seen in the West 
is a progressive degeneration of capitalism into a form of supercapitalism, or anti-capitalism, which the 
less it resembles the original capitalism the more it resembles socialism, or communism. 

Just enough genuine capitalism has remained in most of the countries of the West, and especially in the 
United States of America, to confuse the picture and make it harder for most people to see that 
capitalism has been largely replaced by what is essentially ANTI-CAPITALISM. In other words, the 
weak and struggling capitalism that survives serves as a camouflage for an all- powerful anti-capitalism 
which dominates both economics and politics. 

Modern supercapitalist regimes like that of the United States, and communist regimes like that of the 
Soviet Union, have their differences and their oppositions of interest but these are unimportant when 
compared with what they have in common. Both are irreconcilably antagonistic towards nationalism. 

Therefore, BOTH ARE ESSENTIALLY REVOLUTIONARY, having set themselves in fierce 
antagonism towards those political forms which are essentially evolutionary. 

Since NATIONALISM is inseparably joined to a people's cultural heritage, it follows that all attacks on 
nationalism must include cultural sabotage and subversion - which is what we see today on both sides 
of the Iron and Bamboo Curtains, promoted with equal zeal by supercapitalists and communists. 

There is only one genuine nationalism they support and that is Zionism, which is an internationally 
dispersed Jewish nationalism. Of course, they also support all sorts of spurious "nationalism" which 
they themselves set up and use, like "Black nationalism" in Africa, and even these are nearly always 
heavily laced with Marxism. 

The reason why Western supercapitalism lives in constant dread of nationalism can be easily explained. 

The fundamental issue in any state is whether or not there shall be an authority superior to economics. 
Which shall rule - politics or economics? And there can be no doubt that nationalism, in spite of all the 
ailments to which it is heir, energized by the instincts and will of the population, means that politics is 
the master and that economics, no matter how imoortant it mav be. has been relegated to its orooer and 

natural subordinate status. 

Since there is no way in which communism can be effectively resisted and defeated except by 
nationalism, it follows that supercapitalism is totally committed to co-existence with communism, and 
that supercapitalism can have no other long range aim except that of ultimate convergence with 

Likewise - and this is most important - there is only one political weapon that supercapitalism can use 
against nationalism, and that is a communist ideology that marshals the forces of the underworld and of 
rootless intellectualism, holding them ready to be aimed like a battering ram against any nationalist 

An all-important factor with a binding and directing influence on all the other components of the 20th 
century world-revolution is that of Zionism, which can be described as a geographically dispersed but 
intensely united and passionately motivated Jewish nationalism. Paradoxically the Jewish people have 
come to the fore as a dominant influence in world affairs at a time when most Jews attach little or no 
importance to a religion which for close on two millennia was a powerful binding force. 

Professor Hannah Arendt puts it like this: 

"Twentieth century political developments have driven the Jewish people into the storm 
center of events". 

The developments she describes correspond with the consolidation of Jewish power and influence on a 
global basis, a process that has continued at an accelerating pace since the turn of the century. 

The essentially nationalistic character of Zionism is frankly admitted by Jewish scholar Do. Gideon 
Shimoni, who writes: 

"Zionism embodies a progressive nationalism comparable with socialism according to 
the formula 'Socialist in content and nationalist in form'". 

What is that, if not NATIONAL SOCIALISM? 

The world-revolution can thus be described as a struggle in which one powerful nation is bent on the 
overthrow of all other nations. 

No one must lightly dismiss the question of race; it is the key to world history and it is 
precisely for this reason that written history so often lacks clarity - it is written by people 
who do not understand the race question, and what belongs to it. 

— Benjamin Disraeli 


A Guide to Further Reading 

This guide covers books more directly of political concern and is far from being comprehensive; the 
contents overlap considerably on various subjects. Readers will find that most of the books listed below 
also carry bibliographies. The present writer does not necessarily agree with all the opinions expressed 
in each book listed here. 

Under the heading of CULTURE shown on the previous pages and its explanation in the pages that 
follow, the writer has drawn attention to the subversion of cultural institutions through literature, music, 
art. Although the list below does not give titles from the great works of our literature - the Classics, 
Shakespeare, Milton, etc, down to our own times - it is hardly necessary to state that here lies the richest 
field of understanding, dealing as it does with all those values which give meaning and purpose to 
existence for the individual and for society. 

Gary Allen, 


Robert Ardrey, 

Rosemary Ashton, 


John Baker, 

James Barros, 


P.T. Bauer. 



Ivor Benson, 



Karl Borg & Kathleen Corbett, 


Eric D. Butler. 


Arthur Butz, 


C.G. Campbell, 


Roy Campbell, 


CO. Carter, 

W.D. Chalmers, 


Whitaker Chambers, 

A.K. Chesterton, 


Henry Clark, 


Richard Clard, 

Doug Christie, 


Carleton Coon, 


Earnest Sevier Cox, 

Curtis B. Pall 


Donald Day, 


Leon de Poncins. 


Herman Dinsmore, 


Zygmund Dobbs, 


C.H. Douglas, 


John T. Flynn, 

Joseph Finder, 

R. Gayre, 




David Gilmour, 


Sir John Glubb (Glubb Pasha), 



Nahum Goldmann, 


Grace Halsell, 


H2an Lih-wu, 

Roland Hungford, 


Michael Hurry, 


ElsDeth Huxlev. 


David Irving, 



C.G. Jung, 



Sir Arthur Keith, 


H.S. Kenan, 


Arthur Kitson, 


Stephen Knight, 


Arthur Koestler, 


B.A. Kosmin, 


Bernard Lazare, 

Doris Lessing, 


Liberty Lobby, 


Alfred M. Lilienthal, 


Konrad Lorenz, 


Arthur F. Loveday, 

James J. Martin, 


Brian May, 


Moshe Menuhin, 


Malcolm Muggeridge, 

Revilo Olliver, 


George Orwell, 


Vance Packard, 


Thomas Pakenham, 

Linus Pauling, 


C.Northcote Parkinson, 


Roger Pearson, 

Chapman Pincher, 


James & Suzanne Pool, 

Ezra Pound, 



Carroll Quigley, 


Jean Raspail, 


Victoria Ravenscroft, 


Douglas Reed, 



Wilmot Robertson, 


Malcolm Ross, 


Walter Sanning, 


Gideon Shimoni, 


Cleon Skousen, 


Alexander Solzhenitsyn, 


Oswald Spengler, 


Judge Wilhelm Staglich, 

Lothrop Stoddard, 


Margaret Stucki, 


Montague Summers, 


Sun Yat-sen, 


Antony C. Sutton, 


Thomas Szasz, 


Nikolai Tolstoy, 


F.J.P. Veale, 


Carl von Horn, 

Kenneth Walker, 


Patrick Walsh, 


Thomas Walsh, 


Richard Weaver, 


Charles Weber, 


Nesta Webster, 


Vaughn Williams, 

R. McNair Wilson, 


Francis Parker Vockey, 

J.K. Zawodny,